Jae Crowder?

Not sure I agree with you. We have gotten a slew of young, valuable assets. We have 2/3± of our team as basically first or second year NBA players. 2/3! We aren't running a day care and can't keep looking to add more every year at this rate. It's time to start developing/consolidating what we have.

We really need some more vets to help mentor the youth we have and see what they turn into.

Again, I'm not saying that this team should be entirely kids. That's not a recipe for success. Collecting assets doesn't equate to young players on your roster today. It also includes future picks, and when you do have a lot of young players and future picks, you can consolidate for better young assets to make sure you still have room to have those veteran mentors on your team.

So maybe you don't disagree after all. I'll let you confirm though.

However, there is a time when you should be looking to get as many young, valuable assets as you can and there's a time when you start to consolidate your assets and sign top veteran FAs. We are at the beginning stage.

All it takes is moving back a couple spots in the draft to miss out on guys like these.

However, being a mediocre team can make it increasingly difficult to rise to the top because you're not going to be drafting as high. Stay bad in the short term and be great in the long term, or you can become below average in the short term and stay average/above-average in the long term. That's the way I look at it.

Then I don't know what you are advocating, because in your previous posts in this thread you said:

That sounded a lot like "tank next year" to me.

Then I don't know what you are advocating, because in your previous posts in this thread you said:







That sounded a lot like "tank next year" to me.

And?

Under Vivek the Kings have just kept trying to patch things up each summer and "win now" and all it did was waste four seasons.

Should the Kings sign vets? Of course. But they shouldn't be looking for big names on 3-4 year big money deals. They should be looking to overpay solid vets to one year deals. That and looking to take on bad contracts for future draft picks.

Joerger and the young guys should try to win as many games as they can. But the likely side effect of having so many kids is that they likely won't win many. And that's fine.

NEXT offseason the team will have a very good idea of what they have in the young guys, likely another top 5 pick (and ideally another pick gotten in trade) and caproom.

That is the time to start consolidating assets and signing impact free agents.

Maybe you use the draft pick(s) to add more young talent or you package them with a young player or two to land a star player that fills a need around the core that's been decided on.

But what you don't do is go out this offseason and blow all the cap space on vets that will start and eat up the vast majority of the minutes in front of our youngsters in a misguided attempt to "win now".

The Kings have finally embraced an actual rebuild. They have to have the patience to do it right.

And if a "younger" player that fills a need is obtainable with a long contract do you pass because you want to see what you have?

Divac during his tenure has seemed to have contingency plans already drawn up. I would hope that he wouldn't put all his eggs in the basket of a tomorrow that may never come but also look at acquiring pieces that fit the timeline of the young ones that fill holes. Provided the cost in current assets is minimal. If not available go with the plan you are advocating.

I don't see any younger players on the free agent market that are actually attainable. The closest would be Otto Porter but he's restricted and I think the Wizards either re-sign (most likely) him or sign-and-trade him for Paul George (outside chance).

Otherwise you're left gambling on Ben McLemore type players - signing guys who finished their rookie deals and who were somewhat disappointing with the hope that they have a turnaround. Shabazz Muhammad, Trey Burke etc.

But the names the Kings have been linked to - Millsap, Galinari, trading for Ryan Anderson are all guys at that don't work for a rebuild.

And all of the youngsters may be disappointments. That's the danger of a rebuild. But it's also why you don't sign "win now" guys. Worst case scenario the Kings are bad again and try to draft another star. That's the most likely path for the Kings to ever be good - to draft well.

And so far I think Vlade has been pretty good in that regard.

I actually agree with this but I also don't have a high opinion of my ability in regards to talent evaluation. I would hope AND expect the team especially with the new hires to have a much better idea of what may actually be out there. If Jae Crowder were available as the sweetener to take back a bad contract so Boston can get it's star, I would have to consider it (don't see that happening).

I don't want Millsap or Galinari. Timeline in wrong and I'm not sure they fill a need that might already be a bird in hand.

Let me try and make this a little clearer for everyone since I feel like my stance is being misinterpreted...

1. Limit the veteran talent level to make sure your team is finishing near the bottom thus giving you a higher pick (more often than not) thus giving you a better shot at acquiring star potential

So....tanking. Gotcha.

Well how do you define tanking? Do you define it by players and coaches throwing games/not trying hard? Do you define it by a FO not going after top FA? How often it's thrown around nowadays it's really become subjective so with that in mind, I'd like to hear your definition. From that point, I'd be able to confirm if my idea is in fact tanking (according to your definition).

I get wanting to develop the kids - and I agree. But when 2/3 to 3/4 of your team is kids already, and you are going to lose lots of games by default, tanking to lose even more games isn't the way to go. Get some solid vets to push and mentor the kids and make them earn their starting spots. If you can get a star, do so. I wouldn't mind Fox coming off the bench, for instance, if it means we have shored up the PG position. Haven't we learned already that just granting rookies carte blanche doesn't always work out so well?

We have the same number of first round picks next year, 1, as we normally do. Should we tank EVERY year just to make that year's pick have a slightly chance at being #1? When do you stop that process and get off the merry-go-round?

If we had done that even more this year we would not have jumped up to the top 3 (before the swap). A lot of it is luck. And we have PLENTY of young, promising players on the roster now. Draft well where you land and keep trying to improve.

Our kids need to know what it is to be competitive and learn how to win. Let's give them that chance. Tanking doesn't do that.

Who is advocating for giving the kids the key to the city? I have not advocated anywhere that we should play the kids no matter what. The best player should play. Period. If Joerger doesn't do that, I would be upset with him. As a GM, there is a difference between signing old veterans like Millsap, Gallinari, Lowry, Teague, & Reddick and signing guys like T. Allen, Tolliver, V. Carter, & Tucker. The first group jeopardizes your 1st round pick next year while the 2nd group wouldn't really move the needle all that much. But at the same time, guys in the 2nd group are still going to spark competition. All of those guys are NBA caliber players. As a young kid, once you prove you are a NBA caliber player, great! You get to move ahead of them in the rotation. Until then, you're going to be getting reserve minutes.

That is how you don't jeopardize a future 1st that could land you a star while also not giving any handouts to the young kids.


I have already addressed this but it's possible you missed it. You stop once you have found your stars. You don't stop once you have 2-3 guys who have star potential on your team. You continue to give yourselves good odds at landing a star until you know you have a couple.


You don't know that. You don't know how low we would have finished, and you definitely are not considering variable change.

Sure, the lottery adds a bit of luck to the equation, but in business, all you can do is play the odds. The more you do, the more you set yourself up for success.


Again, I am not saying that the coach or players should be tanking. The coach should play the best players and coach to win every single game. That will establish a winning mindset and drive our young guys to keep developing to be able to leapfrog some of the veterans we brought in. That plan allows us to develop our young guys the right way while still giving us a good shot at a star in next year's draft.

It is possible to have the best of both worlds. Being one dimensional will only hurt us in our situation.

I have seen lots of posts that say that the kids should be getting most/all the playing time; that any vets that would cut their time should not be brought in. Which is insane. We are trying to build a team, not run a kindergarten. I want to go for the best players we can get, which will in turn force the youth to be the best they can be, and which will make the team competitive. Now there is some consideration for timing and development, but if you get the chance to get an Otto Porter or other young stud, you do it and worry about how quickly our draftees develop later.
Every team that tries to win games is putting their first in jeoprady. We did by beating the Clippers and others down the stretch. And you know what, it helped the youth develop. And the pick worked out too. We've gone through our tanking and have a slew of what appear to be good young players to develop. Now is the time to put them through their paces in practice and see if they can earn playing time against real NBA competition.

We may already have our stars, but if we keep shooting for the bottom of the barrel every year just so one draft pick might be 2 spots higher we will continue to be the laughingstock of the league. We need to work with what we have, which is an unprecedented (in recent Sac history) youth and salary space and fan excitement. Tanking again this year would be taking a huge leap backwards.

I agree on the best of both worlds comment. I just think too many folks are worshipping the altar of the draft, which is a giant "?" every year as you don't know what you have for several years. We've bottomed out and are stocked with youth. Now we start going for the development and wins. Intentionally passing on good young players and studs approaching their prime now is counterproductive, not beneficial.

All I know is that if you try and move forward without any established stars, you can easily find yourself in mediocrity. We need to know we have our stars in place. We don't need to THINK we know. We need to know.

I think there are going to be a few small things that we will have to agree to disagree on.

I was not on board with a Millsap, either. But I'm likely not as restrictive as some on the vets we should consider. Don't let the perfect get in the way of the good!

You can't know what you have until you develop them. And constant losing (hoping for slightly better draft pick position) isn't good for development. Otherwise you are on the losing merry-go-round year after year because you won't sign talent (except for a very narrow window of age/cost/whatever) and the youth keep losing. Coaches get fired, player turnover happens, etc. You have to develop a winning attitude and give players hope. Constantly passing on talent to sign lower level vets isn't going to get you there. You load up on good youth prospects (like we have!) and then you turn them loose with strong vets to lead the way and try to start winning.

Unless you draft a LeBron, you don't KNOW you have your star. Curry, Leonard, Thompson, Isaiah Thomas, Paul George, and many, many others were drafted later because nobody was sure exactly how good they would be. We've got the youth. We are playing in a STACKED conference and will lose more than our fair share. Now is the time to get some quality vets (not "low level" as espoused by others) and try to catch some teams by surprise. The draft pick will be fine wherever it lands.

I have seen lots of posts that say that the kids should be getting most/all the playing time; that any vets that would cut their time should not be brought in. Which is insane. We are trying to build a team, not run a kindergarten. I want to go for the best players we can get, which will in turn force the youth to be the best they can be, and which will make the team competitive. Now there is some consideration for timing and development, but if you get the chance to get an Otto Porter or other young stud, you do it and worry about how quickly our draftees develop later.
Every team that tries to win games is putting their first in jeoprady. We did by beating the Clippers and others down the stretch. And you know what, it helped the youth develop. And the pick worked out too. We've gone through our tanking and have a slew of what appear to be good young players to develop. Now is the time to put them through their paces in practice and see if they can earn playing time against real NBA competition.

Knowing that Ainge has to "win" every trade, I don't see how we can get this done.

Fred Katz‏@FredKatz 37m37 minutes ago
More
Source says Boston has already begun contacting teams about picking up Marcus Smart.

This does not surprise me. RFA at the end of 2018 vs Crowder on super cheap deal for next three seasons. Ainge can't afford Smart after next season so may as well cut him loose now.

We then have some more money to ,ake another move

3 team deal
Kings trade Koufos get Crowder
Celtics trade Crowder get "a 2nd round pick or I don't give a rip"
3rd team gets Koufos and gives 2nd round pick

We then have some more money to ,ake another move